Change in D.C.?

Because of D.C.'s unique situation--it's neither a state nor part of any other state--many D.C. agencies carry out both state and local functions. The D.C. Board of Education, for example, fills the role of local school district for Washington, D.C., residents, but it is also responsible for functions carried out by state departments of education in most states (such as designing and managing the accountability system and administering certain federal grants). This is problematic for two reasons: First, there are instances when the responsibilities of local school district and state department of ed conflict, such as dealing with charter schools or sanctions for low-performing DCPS schools. Moreover, the D.C. Board of Ed. hasn't exactly proven itself competent at carrying out either set of its responsibilities.

WaPo reports that the Senate Appropriations Committee is trying to address these issues with a provision in the D.C. Approps bill that would require the D.C. Board of Education to shift some of its state-level functions to another (new or existing) agency. (Full text here, about 2/5 of the way down.)

Normally, this is the kind of thing that would set off a home rule controversy, but at least some Board and Council members quoted by the Post appear amenable to the idea. Clearly, the Board of Education and its governance and oversight of D.C. schools have their problems. Shifting state-level functions to another entity may help a little (although there are also potential problems), but it doesn't address the fundamental issues in D.C. schools.

I'm interested to see what implications this might have for the Board of Education's future as a charter authorizer in the District (Could the entity that takes over state functions also assume the Board of Ed's chartering authority?). And, while I doubt this issue would have much impact on the mayor's race, it's interesting that the Post floats the mayor-controlled State Education Office (run by the excellent Deborah Gist) as a candidate to take over the state-level role. I'm also linking to Nathan at DC edblog, even though he hasn't posted on this yet, because I assume he will at some point and his opinions and analysis on D.C.-related education issues are valuable.

Also of note in the Senate committee version of D.C. approps: The bill would fund the D.C. resident tuition support program (which allows kids graduating from D.C. schools to attend universities in other states at in-state tuition rates) at current funding, maintain the current cap on attorneys' fees for special ed, and allow students currently receiving vouchers under the federally-funded D.C. voucher program to continue to receive vouchers if their family incomes rise to up to 300% of poverty (currently students are out once their parents earn more than 200% of poverty).